Moreover, numerous panels have viewed website suspension by the Registrar or webhost, absent any
explanation or attempted justification by the respondent, as added corroboration of bad faith. See LEGO
Juris A/S v. Ammar Briouel / Brahim Mahjoubi, WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension
following a takedown request by the complainant); Hershey Entertainment & Resorts Company v. ...
2026-03-12 - Case Details
Miami Investment Brokers Inc, WIPO Case No. D2012-1213); LEGO
Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio
Electronico, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-05-24 - Case Details
Prior
panels have held that bad faith can be found where a domain name is so obviously connected with a
well-known trademark that its very use by someone with no connection to the trademarks suggests
opportunistic bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). Given the
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2009/d2009-0320.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2009/d2009-0113.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...
2022-10-18 - Case Details
The Panel thus infers that Respondent must have been aware of this trademark and its reputation when it registered the disputed domain name, so that the disputed domain name () was registered in bad faith”); LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains, LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-05-05 - Case Details
In
the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use its trademarks, no bona fide or
legitimate use of the disputed domain name could reasonably be claimed under the circumstances of this
case (see, e.g., Sportswear Company S.P.A. v. Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; LEGO Juris A/S
v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO
Case No. ...
2022-07-18 - Case Details
D2014-1875, Sportswear Company S.PA. v. Tang Hong; WIPO Case No. D2010-0138, LEGO Juris A/S v.
DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master).
...
2022-08-11 - Case Details
争议域名也包括通用顶级域名后缀“.com”。专家组认为该部分在本案中亦不具有任何区别争议域名与投诉人商标的效果。参见LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Chen Yong，WIPO 案件编号 D2009-1611及Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG 诉 zhanglei，WIPO 案件编号 D2014-0080。
...
2020-09-11 - Case Details
Bad faith may be found where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark that said use of the domain name by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains, LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-09-25 - Case Details
D2021-0774; Compagnie Générale des Etablissements Michelin v. Milen Radumilo,
WIPO Case No. DCO2020-0090; LEGO Juris A/S v. ken Teo,
WIPO Case No. D2020-2380; Sanofi v. WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc. / Todd Peter,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-07-01 - Case Details
UDRP panels have found that a disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark where the disputed domain name incorporates the complainant’s trademark in its entirety (e.g., LEGO Juris A/S v. ken Teo,
WIPO Case No. D2020-2380; Sanofi v. WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc. / Todd Peter,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-02-18 - Case Details
The Panel
takes this as corroborating evidence of Respondent’s bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Ammar Briouel / Brahim
Mahjoubi, WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension following a takedown request by
Complainant).
...
2022-09-05 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that the addition of a descriptive term to a disputed domain name that incorporates a trademark in its entirety typically does not prevent the finding of confusing similarity. See LEGO Juris A/S v. DBA David Inc/ DomainsByProxy.com,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1290.
For all the foregoing reasons, the Panel finds that the first element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has therefore been satisfied by the Complainant.
...
2022-01-04 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name because the Respondent has no trademark rights in or license to use the Complainant's trademarks (citing LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2014-12-29 - Case Details
Registered and Used in Bad Faith
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark its very use by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494, Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2014-02-21 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark its very use by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494, Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC.
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-12-17 - Case Details
关于该些字母，专家组认为它们都不具有区别争议域名与投诉人商标的显著效果。关于通用顶级域名后缀，专家组认为在本案中亦不具有任何区别争议域名与投诉人商标的效果（参见LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Chen Yong，WIPO案件编号D2009-1611及Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG 诉 zhanglei，WIPO案件编号D2014-0080）。...
2016-11-14 - Case Details
其唯一其余部分为一个顶级域名后缀“.mom”，可译为“妈妈”。专家组认为该顶级域名后缀在本案中不具有任何区别争议域名与投诉人商标的效果 (参见LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Chen Yong，WIPO案件编号D2009-1611及Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG 诉 zhanglei，WIPO案件编号D2014-0080）。...
2016-11-08 - Case Details
A gTLD suffix generally has no capacity to dispel confusing similarity with a trademark as it is typically disregarded under the first element test. See Lego Juris A/S v. Chen Yong,
WIPO Case No. D2009-1611; Dr. Ing. H.c. F. Porsche AG v. zhanglei,
WIPO Case No. ...
2016-11-02 - Case Details
Previous Panels have held that the registration of a domain name obviously connected with well-known trademarks by someone without any connection to these trademarks suggests opportunistic bad faith. See, among others, LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494.
At the time of initial filing of the Complaint, the Respondent employed a privacy service to hide his identity, which past panels have held serves as further evidence of bad faith registration and use. ...
2016-09-20 - Case Details
Dublin) Limited v. Dejan Macesic,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1698; and LEGO Juris A/S v. Andrew Orr,
WIPO Case No. D2015-1311).
The website to which the disputed domain name resolves features advertisements associated with third parties. ...
2016-10-20 - Case Details